In 2025, More Than 30 Beauty Companies Pursued IPOs, Only Six Succeeded

As 2025 draws to a close, the beauty sector faces not only year‑end performance reviews but also intense scrutiny over its progress in capital markets. According to incomplete statistics compiled by Jumeili, more than thirty companies across the value chain — including raw‑material suppliers, packaging providers and brand owners — initiated listing processes on A‑shares, the Hong Kong market and U.S. exchanges this year. Despite the volume of applicants, only a small fraction completed listings in 2025, while the majority remain in preparatory stages such as IPO guidance or prospectus submission.

The cohort of successful issuers this year comprises six firms that demonstrated focused positioning, clear business models and operational maturity. These companies are Yingtong Holdings, a brand management firm with partnerships including Hermès and Bvlgari; Puhe Bio, a specialist in professional skin‑management services; Pitanium Limited, a Hong Kong‑based retailer of premium personal‑care products; Jushuitan, an e‑commerce operations provider for beauty merchants; Heyuan Bio, a recombinant collagen developer; and Minglue Technology, a data‑services provider. Among them, three listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, two completed listings on Nasdaq, and one secured a listing on the A‑share market.

Beyond the six successful listings, a larger group of notable companies remains in the IPO pipeline. Naturaltang reported revenue approaching RMB 2.5 billion, Weiqi Technology continues to deepen its presence in peptide‑based products, and Kaijie E‑Commerce provides services to online retailers; each has initiated listing procedures but largely remains at the prospectus or guidance stage. Lin Qingxuan moved most rapidly, passing its hearing on December 14 and commencing its offering four days later. Other firms that announced listing plans in 2023 or early 2025, such as Lanshu Shares and Guyu, have so far completed only guidance, while Jiakai Bio saw its application lapse after an audit report expired and must update its filing. Overall, brand owners and raw‑material suppliers constitute the core of this IPO wave, reflecting investor preference for companies with established market positions, defined brand strategies and technical barriers.

The Hong Kong market emerged as the primary destination for beauty IPOs in the post‑2022 environment. A‑share issuance was concentrated between 2017 and 2021 and tightened markedly after 2022; the 2023 regulatory measures that temporarily slowed IPO cadence contributed to a sharp year‑on‑year decline in A‑share listings and financing. In contrast, Hong Kong listings have clustered since 2022 and, at times, have produced market capitalizations that rival or exceed A‑share peers. This shift has been supported by mainland regulatory measures encouraging Hong Kong listings and by the Hong Kong Exchange’s own reforms to allocation and free‑float rules, which together have enhanced the market’s appeal for domestic beauty companies.

The pursuit of dual listings has also gained traction as leading domestic brands seek international expansion. Several A‑share companies have filed for Hong Kong listings, reflecting a broader industry trend toward “A+H” strategies. Proya formally announced its Hong Kong listing plan in August and appointed Xue Xia as board secretary to support the process; management highlighted the international endorsement and acquisition channels that a Hong Kong listing can provide. On November 12, Marubi Bio disclosed plans to issue H‑shares and apply for a main‑board listing in Hong Kong, underscoring the sector’s reorientation toward the city as a primary capital market.

Despite policy tailwinds, the path to listing has proven uneven. The Hong Kong Exchange received 402 new listing submissions in 2025, of which 117 are listed or pending and 331 remain under processing. This backlog means that companies seeking expedited approval must present robust financial performance and competitive advantages. Market participants note that the Exchange’s capacity constraints and regulatory prudence favor larger, stable enterprises with lower perceived risk, which places additional pressure on smaller or single‑brand operators.

Three structural challenges stand out for IPO candidates: sustainable profitability, a diversified brand matrix, and research and development capability. Profitability gaps are evident when comparing IPO hopefuls with listed peers. In the first half of 2025, Proya reported revenue exceeding RMB 5 billion, while Shangmei Shares and Giant Bio ranked second and third by revenue. Naturaltang’s revenue is approaching that of Mao Geping, whereas Plant Doctor and Lin Qingxuan remain near the RMB 1 billion level. Giant Bio led peers with net profit of RMB 1.182 billion, followed by Proya at nearly RMB 800 million; only four companies in the sample reported net profit above RMB 500 million. Gross margins for most domestic beauty firms cluster between 70% and 80%, with Lin Qingxuan posting an 82.4% margin and Plant Doctor at 60.99%, indicating variation in brand premium and cost control across the sector. These figures underscore that insufficient scale and uncertain sustainability of earnings are primary hurdles for many issuers.

Single‑brand business models present additional listing risks. Firms with diversified brand portfolios, such as Proya and Shangmei, have greater resilience and multiple growth levers, while single‑brand operators like Guyu, Lin Qingxuan and Plant Doctor concentrate revenue and risk in a narrower set of products or channels. Heavy reliance on a single flagship product or on online distribution can expose companies to sharp revenue volatility if consumer preferences shift or operational missteps occur. Market observers note that capital markets increasingly reward firms that can demonstrate multi‑brand, multi‑category strategies that broaden addressable markets and reduce concentration risk.

Research and development investment remains a decisive differentiator. Huaxi Bio has historically led the sector in R&D spending, recording RMB 231 million in the first half of 2025, while Giant Bio reduced R&D expenditure by 15.5% to RMB 41 million. Lin Qingxuan increased R&D spending by more than 37% in the same period, signaling efforts to close capability gaps. Mao Geping has acknowledged prior criticism of low R&D intensity and announced plans to establish domestic and overseas research centers to develop proprietary formulations. Outside of Huaxi Bio, few firms have R&D ratios that meet the commonly cited industry benchmark of 2%–3% of revenue; Huaxi Bio’s R&D ratio stands at 10.22%. The limited number of companies meeting this “baseline” highlights the sector’s broader need to strengthen scientific and product‑development capabilities.

The 2025 IPO cycle in beauty thus reflects both enthusiasm and constraint. While capital markets can provide growth capital, the listing process functions as a rigorous assessment of corporate fundamentals. Short‑term financing alone will not substitute for sustained investment in R&D and product competitiveness. Companies that convert capital into durable technological advantages and a diversified product matrix will be best positioned to withstand market cycles and evolve from “capital favorites” into industry benchmarks, driving higher‑quality development across the domestic beauty sector.